OCR Text |
Show j News P$ BehindM Dy PaulMallon Js?' Released by Western Newspaper Union. FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND RADIO WASHINGTON. The magpies-limb magpies-limb has been rather contentedly quiet since election. What few yipes have emanated therefrom have, however, disclosed that some curious curi-ous ideas about democracy and freedom free-dom are developing in this country. coun-try. For example, it is the radio that Is free and the press is shackled says an unfriendly reader from a small Wisconsin community. He reasons it out that the radio generally gen-erally does not take sides in political politi-cal arguments, does not criticize group actions of a political nature, and, therefore, is "free," while the newspapers, with their various editorial edi-torial policies, express preferences and criticize political groups and, therefore, are unfree. The radio is not primarily a public pub-lic service. It is an amusement business. Its character is more that of a theater than a newspaper. It handles news only as a minor sideline. side-line. Also, it gets practically all its news from the same sources as most newspapers, the press associations. Chosen as its commentators are many men who have a theatrical delivery style, not always those who know most about news. My Wisconsin friend is factually wrong also in assuming radio commentators com-mentators did not represent both sides in the last election. They did, and I hope will always continue to represent both sides strongly. To keep political discussion free of criticism would bring a weak-ton-gued nothingness in popular expression expres-sion and further enable selfish poli-ticos poli-ticos to work the people for themselves. them-selves. Here is the point where my Wisconsin Wis-consin friend, and so many who believe be-lieve as he does, have fallen into undemocratic delusions. "Without controversy," says Churchill, "Democracies cannot achieve their healthening processes." proc-esses." Freedom is not one-sided. Politically, Poli-tically, it may be that in Russia, and perhaps other spots in the world, but in this democracy, freedom free-dom of expression means the right to be in a minority. Oppositions are not extinguished or purged after elections. Indeed, it means the right to be vitriolic, or even the right to be wrong. It requires criticism of all forces in politics. Business Reasonable. Generally, most people in the commentating far more than in the political -- business strive to be reasonable and factual, but they have the right to be unreasonable and humorous. There are all kinds of people on all sides of every question. ques-tion. The very nature of democracy democ-racy assumes that they will express themselves freely in their own way, and, from their debate, hot or cold, decisions will come. The press is far more free than radio. The air waves are under government gov-ernment supervision, supposed to be technical, but you may have noticed the Democratic campaign publicity pub-licity director, Paul Porter, has been given the radio (communications) commission chairmanship. Certainly radio has a constant fight on its hands to keep itself free, as licenses must be frequently fre-quently renewed and the radio commission can at any time drive a station out of business. Not so with the press. Its primary business is news and it is not under government supervision, although its newsprint is rationed and news" censored by government. Furthermore, Further-more, it has a heritage in news presentation, pres-entation, evident in the mind of any young scoop reporter, anxious to get all the facts no matter who they help or hurt. Competition is faster than in any other business I know. The fight for exclusive presentation, presenta-tion, practical Judgment, better written newspapers, more complete coverage, is vicious and eternal. Editorially, every shade of public mind is presented. By and large, it is the newspapers which keep the intelligent people of the country informed. in-formed. Radio cannot do it, lacking a medium permitting thoughtful story or financial incentive for news development. Only a few people seem interested in preventing the expression publicly public-ly of any views except those with which they agree. These people are not only undemocratic but unwise. They can never add to their own understanding or store of knowledge knowl-edge by listening to those who agree with them. They can learn much from those who disagree. A restless appetite for something called "freedom" is ldbse in the land. The youth wants it. This is what war is being fought for. Most of the internationally agitating agi-tating societies in New York also have the word freedom attached to their titles Polish, Russian, internationalist, inter-nationalist, what not. But what is this "freedom" for which we yearn? It must be something some-thing different from that freedom which we have had. It is not alone democracy, for we have had that, still have it. We need a definition of freedom. |